Pampers is facing outrage over a picture on their packaging after a Muslim group alleged they see the word "Mohammed" spelled out in the whiskers of the nappy brand’s cartoon cat mascot. Muslims in India were filmed burning piles of Pampers products and called for a boycott of the brand, reports said Thursday.

The lines illustrating the whiskers, nose, mouth and left eye of the smiling feline that appears on each nappy and on the brand’s packaging allegedly closely resembles the Islamic prophet “Mohammed’s” name when written in Urdu or Arabic.

According to several reports, members of the Darsgah Jihad-o-Shahadat group went on to lodge a formal complaint with police in the Indian city of Hyderabad on Tuesday over the alleged "insult" to Islam.

Several videos emerged of activists burning packets of Pampers Baby Dry Pants in protest in the streets of Hyderabad.

In a formal letter to police, the Muslim group claimed the "name of Prophet can be seen printed" on the packet in Arabic "even with the bare eye," adding it had "hurt the feelings of the entire Muslim community."

"Therefore we request your goodself to kindly immediately intervene into the matter forthwith and stop the sale and distribution of Baby Dry Pants of Pampers Company and take action against its manufacturers [sic], arrest them and punish them," the letter added.

One of the complainants, a member of the Muslim group, Shahnoor Khan, told the Deccan Chronicle the group believed the company "deliberately printed" the word on each nappy to "hurt the Muslim community" and thus spark community unrest.

Reactions on social media regarding the boycott were varied. While some joined the call for a Pampers ban, others insisted the cartoon was just an innocent drawing of a cat which was taken out of context.

One of the users, Nasar Alam Khan wrote: "Please request every Muslim brother and sister to boycott this product. It’s the only way to prove our strength and the love for our Prophet."

Another named Imtiyaz Naikoo commented: "Please grow up. It’s a cat with two eyes and a mustache."

While Azam Shariff said: "Maybe it’s the fault of the creative team but whatever the case is, directly or indirectly, it’s manifesting the name of (our) holy Prophet. That is a sheer desecration, it’s insulting. Don’t use the products until they change this, until they apologise."

On its website, Procter and Gamble say it is a global brand that has "served millions of babies since its launch in the Arabian Peninsula."

Procter and Gamble senior communications manager Scott Popham said: "I am aware of false and misleading information about Pampers being spread via social media channels such as Facebook and YouTube. The design on the Pampers Baby Dry Pants shows an innocent animated representation of a cat. It shows a cat’s mouth and whiskers like it is commonly portrayed in drawings and cartoons across the world, especially by little children."

"The intent behind the use of this cartoon is completely innocent and we would never intend to offend any person, religion or cultural belief. As a responsible corporate citizen, we respect all religions, cultures, customs and beliefs," Popham added.

Not only must we reduce the negative affect we have on the environment we must also as a people start taking actions to positively improve the environment.

White people are the only people where environmentalism is a concern, in this way it is a shame we are less than 10% of the world's population because there is no way we can counterbalance the other 90%. Especially considering even amongst white people it is not a real concern, even our environmentalists are only environmentalists nominally. They leave masses of litter at their protests and don't actually do anything positive for the environment. Typical of leftists, they will project an image of themselves but it is almost never backed up with action.

The battle between good and evil is real only those who know God the way they should will understand that the devil is using the new technology to attack not only our kids but all of us if we are not watching and praying...

Christianity is the only thing stopping me (M16) from killing animals.
I genuinely want to capture animals, from smaller ones all the way to common household pets, and kill them. My mother is a devout Christian and I guess you could say that I was exposed to Christianity from the very beginning. My father left before I was born but regardless of this fact, I grew up in an extremely stable environment.

Back to the topic at hand, I have very strong urges to capture animals and instead of killing them straight away, I'm not going to sugercoat this in any way but I would love to torture them before ending it. I've had these urges since I was 12 or possibly 13 years of age.

Since Christianity has been a part of my life, albeit somewhat forced, the only thing stopping me from carrying out my internal desire is the fear of sinning in the very back of my mind. I should also mention I feel very little remorse. If it wasn't for that single thought, I would've already begun doing the things I've stated above.

Honestly, I feel it's kind of unfair that I can't do these things to animals due to law, religion and the moral standards of people.

For God not to exist, we need to assume -
1. That the universe came into being on its own without divine help
2. That the initial conditions concerning the incredibly fine tuned balance between the rate of expansion of the universe an the force of Gravity (the cosmological constant) which allowed the formation of stars and galaxies was not intentional.
3. That the first living cell came into being through the actions of random, unguided, purposeless events.
4. That a sufficient quantity and quality of beneficial mutations can be generated from random events to drive the process of evolution.
5. That the detrimental effects of harmful mutations could not wipe out life entirely.
6. That every one of the billions of discrete mutations needed to form life as we know it was able to provide sufficient survival advantage in its own right to facilitate natural selection.
7. That molecular activity alone can generate self awareness.
8. That every event needed to write this post was an inevitable consequence of previous events, because we must assume that there can be no such thing as free will.

And we must presume that all these assumptions are true because God does not exist.

I was an atheist into my 5th decade! But, except for a few years around college, I knew that abortion was wrong.
Not long after Roe v Wade, my Mom pulled me aside and told me that abortion was OK. I said "What about the baby?" She said "We don't have to think about the baby - it will be OK."
I was still pretty young, and this conversation went on for several iterations, and so for a few years I thought to myself "Well, maybe there are emergency situations where it is OK." But, I could never get over that question "What about the baby?" and my Mom's reply that we don't have to consider him or her - the baby.
It creeped me out, frankly, and when I see so many pro-abortion arguments that are completely devoid of ANY consideration whatsoever for the child, it still creeps me out. it's like the child in the womb is completely invisible to them. (And this despite advances in ultrasound images of the preborn child,
and pictures and videos of abortion, which were not around much in those days.)
But, my Mom NEVER questioned that the baby was a baby - and this was in the years right after Roe.
So, that is why I believe that on settled science (the human in the womb is a human, the baby in the womb is a baby, etc) and the minimal morality that we do not execute the innocent, I think that ANYONE can know that abortion is wrong - if they are sincere and rational truth-seekers.
But, I will always be inspired by secularists who speak up against it!

Communism in eastern Europe produced pollution on a scale unimaginable in the West. Their industry was also woefully inefficient in terms of CO2 output per KW and their usage of energy... but CAPITALISM!!!!1! I guess.

It was not communism: it was totalitarianism/fascism. A government run by a few private interests to the detriment of the people and the land.

They only called it "communism" to confuse their ignorant people and knee-jerk Republicans and their fear of those dirty poor folk.

Rapists, sex traffickers, pimps, and pedophiles all love abortion mills, because that is where they take their victims to have the "evidence" of their crimes destroyed.
Abusive bro-aborts love them as well, because they can kill off their "child support obligations" there.

This can't be a serious TIFU. If it is, your sister molested a 11 year old boy and a family member at that. We're not talking statutory rape either, which is still wrong of course, but this is outright pedophilia and child molestation. She is a sexual predator and hopefully she gets some serious jail time. As for you, well, I think your actions are indefensible and you deserve whatever consequences come your way.

Well, I posted on ELI5 and since my brother is 11(10 when it started) my sister isn't a pedophile, but more likely a hebephile.She may be a predator, but she does not need jail time.My sister needs help not prison.

She intentionally harmed another person, even worse she harmed a child. If anything deserves prison that's it. I'm not sure what the folks in ELI5 said but someone who molests a 10 year old I think qualifies as a pedophile.

Honestly I'm not sure if she actually hurt my brother.My brother was fine at the time of the sexual contact and he only changed and became gloomy when she left.He keeps telling me and our parents how much he misses our sister.I think there's a certain age of the child where the perpetrator becomes a hebephile and not a pedophile and 11 is around the age where it enters into hebephile territory

11 is at the very bottom end, and you said it started when he was 10. She's a pedophile. Your sister is sick and frankly you sound a little sick yourself. Hopefully your sister spends a good amount of her life in prison. And given your indifference to your brother being victimized I hope you see some life altering consequences yourself...you def seem to need a reality check.

Well than I have to disagree with you.As I said many times my sister doesn't need jail time she needs help.Fortunately she's an attractive, white woman from an affluent family who's done a lot of good in our community.If what the things I've read is correct than she'll probably get a lenient sentence and that's what I'm praying for.

You are almost as bad as your sister. I feel bad for your poor brother, and I hope that your parents send you away so that he doesn't have to live with your disgusting pedophile enabling behavior. He deserves siblings that don't rape him, and siblings that don't enable his rapist and then diminish what he went through.

I know it's not the politically correct thing to say,but I do doubt whether my sister hurt my brother.I've gotten a lot of pms saying that they consensually had sex at ages 10 and 11 and they turned out fine.I also remember there was a thread where people lost their virginities at young ages and they turned out fine as well.My brother was fine at the time of the sexual contact, but he's gloomy now because he misses our sister.He keeps telling me how much he misses LilyI'm not defending what she did I'm just trying to help and care for her to the best of my abilities.

Mark: You can't eternally punish someone who doesn't exist. And if Hitler has been annihilated, he certainly suffered a lot less than his millions of victims.
Sorry, guys. Not buying it. Annihilation is not punishment. It is literally NOTHING. It isn't just, and God is just. Paul said, "Knowing the TERROR of the Lord, we persuade men." Nothing terrible about mere nonexistence. It was like that for me before I was born, anyway. From nothing, into nothing? No. Jesus was not annihilated on the cross for me. He was forsaken and separated from His Father for the first time ever. Either I let Jesus pay for my sins (and I have), or I pay for them myself. Annihilation is not payment. It is a get out of payment free card. Especially if guys like Hitler and my nice but unbelieving brother in law meet the same fate. If their fate is somehow different under annihilationism, I don't see how.

...

Mark: P.S. Anybody reading this old enough to remember the old beer commercial from the 70s? "You only go around ONCE in life, so grab all the gusto you can!" If I know that I can live any old way I like and in the end the worst thing that will happen to me is annihilation, why SHOULDN'T I live it up? If we only live once, then why deny ourselves anything? Just do like Hitler did and kill yourself. You won't go to jail, and God won't punish you after death either. Self-denial is for suckers, and heaven sounds boring anyway, right? Live it up.

Ronnie: Are you saying that the only thing that's stopping you from living like Hitler is the threat of endless torment ? I really don't think that's a commendable model Mark.

Mark: No. What I am saying is it would be unjust for God to mete out the exact same punishment (annihilation) for all who die unbelievers, regardless of whether they were a Hitler or say, an Albert Schweitzer, who was a good man who rejected Christianity. Abraham said it best: "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" And as for what the Bible says, Jesus talked more about hell than He did about heaven; more so than anyone in the entire Bible. So much so that He has been called "the preacher of Hell."
I'm also still waiting on a response to Matt. 25:46, where it describes the punishment of hell and our life in heaven with the same word: eternal (aionios). This is what the Bible says.

Your running away from a simple Biblical discussion, with your tail between your legs, is rather telling relative to your Biblical ignorance. Even more so is your condemnation of Biblical rebuke as done by the preacher boy in the OP, and by so many other street preachers, including yours truly! In fact, the T-man was preaching for the past three day to high school students in the disgustingly sinful California. Have you ever tried doing that? I think NOT! I bet you wouldn't last two minutes of standing on top of your car or van parked near a pagan secular high school and preaching to a bunch of arrogant, candya$$ whimps who do not have the parents or pastors to put a boot up their behinds and explain them what awaits them if they don't come Jesus.

To put it bluntly, it is those like you, who avoid "offending" pagans by calling a spade a spade, or "offending" harlots by calling them such, or "offending" some parents by explaining the horrors of hell to their children, or "offending" some lieberals by telling them that Jesus hates (Ps. 5:5) the unSaved, that are screwing it up for everyone! The Christian can only encourage you to read the Christian Bible, AV 1611, and accept ALL that it says in it's full historical-grammatical context! That would include the "harsh language" of John 8:44, Matthew 23, Ezekiel 23, and many others. Also it would include our Jesus KILLING those that displease Him with hemorrhoids, smiting people to death, being "mean" to the lebidisian and the sodomite in Romans 1, and aborting babies! Yes, I am talking about Him as the God of both the New AND the Old Testaments. Praise Him and His love for His true followers, His children!

The Christian will leave you with some food for thought:

Just maybe in the aftermath, you will do some serious Bible study and will be able to proverbially run with the "big dogs" relative to preaching the Word of the Christian Bible.

rueangel:
Well, certainly, any right thinking person must agree, that, any ,..well rounded,..5 year old should have a working knowledge of ,..male on male anal sex,..but perhaps, the subjects of the use of ,..whips, or fisting,.. should be not be introduced until the child is, at least, 6,..
Ya think,.?

Sally Edwards:
I'm not surprised this story outrages you if that's the first thing that comes to your mind when you think of homosexuality. Let's just take the most extreme sexual practices and define them all by that. By the way, where did you ever get the idea that straight people WEREN'T into all the things you listed?

rueangel:
So,.. where id you ever get the idea that I thought that these practices were limited to gay males,.?
But, anyway, while the perversions listed above are ,..occasionally, practiced by,..some,.. herteros, they are key component among gay males, & I believe that fisting is, pretty much, a gay male practice

Sally Edwards:
Practiced by what, a fraction of a percentage of them? You can't single out an entire group for any specific sexual practice. And no, I Googled "fisting" and there are entire books written about it.

rueangel:
The fact of the matter is, that, male on male anal penetration of the anus , by the penis, is the most common male homosexual activity. And,..
Such male on male anal penetration of the anus , will, in time, cause damage to the anus, & leave a percentage of those who engage in that practice to be left,..' pooing,.. in a bag that is strapped to their leg
And, not to mention the negative health affects of poking a penis around into all of that ,..poo.
But, anyway, I fail to understand why grade schoolers need o be subjected to any description of any homosexual act, whether,..'extreme',.. or not. I mean..what's the point?
But anyway, lets get real here,..In that the ,.'REAL",.. purpose of introducing the subject of homosexuality, into grade schools. & depicting it in such a ,.'positive',.. light, is to,.'brainwash',... a portion of those grade schoolers into,..'becoming',.. homosexual themselves,..which is a part of the ,.'NEW WORLD ORDER',.. agenda which includes the destruction of the family, & population control,..
And,..
I will add to that, the fact that the Zionist owned, media, is pushing this homosexual agenda, to the limit, as a means of destroying the moral fiber of the Goyim, in order to destroy western civilization, & to, thereby, genocide the White race, & thereby leave ,..'World, Zionist Jewry',.. ruling over a world of ,..'brown,.. people, with average IQs of about 70.
I refer you to the,..'KALERGI PLAN',.. which lays out this demonic, Zionist, Rothschild, conspiracy, in detail.
I note, that, while, on one hand, the Zio media, & Zio controlled educational system is pushing this homosexual agenda, in the public schools, I doubt that it is being pushed in ,..'JEWISH',.. schools, & while it is also being pushed by Zionist interests in Europe & Canada, & Australia,. as far as I know, I don't think that it is being pushed on Jewish children in Israel,..
Just turnover any rock, & underneath,it, you will find there lurking a Zionist Jew,..
Google,..'KALERGY PLAN',..

Sally Edwards:
Here’s how we know your information is a crock.
Anal sex is very common between straight couples too. How many women do I see with a bag to crap in? Come to think of it, how many gay men do I ever see who have to “go” in a bag? Zero.

rueangel:
The fact of the matter is, that, the anus is designed for,..one way,..traffic & anal sex can lead to damage that can lead to the necessity of using a ,..bag, that is strapped to the leg, & also it can spread diseas,..Did you ever head of AIDS,.? & just because you never saw such a bag, doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.
But anyway, back to the issue at hand, which is, whether, of not homosexuality should be pushed onto grade schoolers, in such a way as to encourage it practice, by children that have not yet developed their own ,..'natural, inherent, hertero sexual nature,..
As in my comment above, I point out that there is an agenda afoot, to increase the incidence of homosexuality, as a means of cutting down the birthrates, this agenda, being pushed, largely by Zionist/Rothschild/Soros NWO type entities.

Sally Edwards:
Of course 6 year olds don't need to know the particulars of anal sex, but who's talking about teaching them that in the first place? Especially when you don't teach straight intercourse to 6 year olds, either.
It's like I said to Amos earlier, you teach children about homosexuals by simply saying sometimes a boy will fall in love with another boy or a girl will fall in love with another girl. That's all you need to say.
What you've been taught about people with damaged anuses is a lie. That doesn't happen. Or if it does, it's rare and would not be specific to homosexuals. Many homosexual men don't even engage in anal sex.

rueangel:
Back in the,..'olden days',.. when I wen to grade school,, back in the first half of the last century, we somehow managed to get through K to 12 without the subject of homosexuality ever being brought up in a classroom, but somehow we managed to grow up & get through life, without, such indoctrination,..having learned through the grapevine at about age 10, or so, that there were some guys, that liked to suck on each other's peepee weenies, & we learned that these guys were called queers,..& that was about all we needed to know. It was only , somewhat later that we heard bout anal sex, which we considered to be really,..real;y disgusting.
And, as to the idea that male on male sexual attraction has something to do with ,..'love',.. The fact of the matter is that gay males are notoriously promiscuous, often having hundreds, or even thousands of ,..'partners',.. in their lifetimes.
And male on male anal sex, often has an element of ,..'domination, and/or Sado -masochism involved, especially in rape situations, whether it is male on male, or male on female,..
And
Black males,, especially, , seem to enjoy inflicting pain, and or injury on their victims with their,.. tools.,..which they use as weapons/, of attacks on the anus of their victims..
So sure, I know that herteros also, indulge in anal sex, but that is largely because anal sex is being pushed by the Zio-Media as being, particularly, exciting & ,..'trendy'.
So, I still maintain that there is nothing healthy about anal sex, from either a physical,or a mental point of view,..
And,..
If it is going to be discussed in school, the discussion should consist of warnings against it,..For all of the reasons, mention above & previously,..

Responding to Ronnie's latest above: I was speaking from a pagan's point of view. If there won't be a final accounting for my sins, why should I repent of them and be saved? Why not live it up, knowing that God will merely annihilate me, rather than make me suffer as I have made others suffer? From nothing into nothing? Most pagans believe that already. Are we to tell them that they're right, that all that religious talk about hellfire and eternal damnation is just rot, and that an eternity without God and Christ is no big deal? Are we not comforting them in their sins? A strange form of evangelism, to be sure.
And yes, I do believe in degrees of punishment in hell, just as I believe in degrees of reward in heaven (Rev. 20:11-25). The greatest torment will lie in being separated from the presence of God by one's own choice, forever.

Jesus, you're retarded. Believe it or not, all people in the world are not the same and their cultural values differ.

In Europe you wouldn't report someone downloading cp if he was your relative, that's simply unthinkable. In America, you will be praised for that. In America, your relatives would betray you like Judas, they would throw you down to the authorities just because you broke some stupid law.

The Democrat plan for America is to open the borders, neuter the police, take money from those who work and give it to those who don't, wage war eternally without goals, borrow without limit, disarm the law abiding, criminalize self defense, glorify homosexuality, sterilize women, and murder the unborn. It's not a policy disagreement, it's literally a plan to destroy the country, and anyone who isn't fighting that as a literal threat to our survival, is an accomplice to our demise.

Lady Checkmate:
Todd is correct, that survey had NOTHING to do with Black History Month, but was instead about pushing a wicked agenda in an attempt to normalize the abnormal with an end goal of legalizing child rape. It is offensive that anyone (the racist alt-left in this instance) would try to associate sexualizing children with Black History Month and as a Christian AA, I find it disgusting that anyone would attempt to use the AA experience to push an agenda that not ALL of us support. Whoever gave that survey to children should be immediately released from their contract and have their licenses, certifications, etc., revoked. To the racist alt-left lost who assume they can equate the color of our skin with their sin...STOP it. Do NOT equate sin with the color of our skin. Your racism and hate is worse than anything you accuse others of. Being AA is NOT a sin, but behavior that goes against God's word is sin. Seek Jesus Christ.

Mick Williams:
Horror of horrors. . . a Christian lab partner! The poor liberal would be traumatized for life.

The whole rise of the modern “boyfriend and girlfriend” thing is not healthy for society. It allows women to engage in the practice of “serial monogamy,” which is their preferred method of realizing their hypergamous sexual strategy. It also prevents normal family life, because formal marriage implies a commitment to a shared household, unlike bf/gf-ism. Feminists want to prevent normal family life from being the norm in society, because they want women engage in careerism, which is also why Feminists advocate so strongly for prolonged ‘education’ for the females; what the Feminists seek is to destroy the family for the purpose of making society a more “comfortable place” for their mutant androgenized-dyke lifestyles. Therefore, Feminists are very fine indeed with the modern situation of widespread bf/gf-ism. These female mutants hate the formal institution of marriage for a reason.

(In a previous post I wrote that I don’t seek to de-humanize the Feminists, but you know what? I’m gonna de-humanize the shit out of them)

While there is no reason to be principally opposed to all bf/gf situations, and while bf/gf situations in some cases may lead to marriage, the truth of the matter is that a strong marriage culture is vastly superior to the current state of affairs. In a society where formal marriage is the norm, we know which woman belongs to which man, and so women can’t play their manipulative tricks on society – their power is diminished when sexual anarcho-tyranny of gynoicentrism is replaced with a pro-male sexual order. Formal sexual order in the form of marriage cuts through the bullshit of women, whereas the informal bf/gf-ism situation with which we are now dealing makes it all too easy for women to determine how the sexual landscape would look like; the results are not pretty, to say the least, with widespread involuntary celibacy, skyrocketing divorce rates when marriage does occur, and an overall feeling of sex-based antagonism between men and women – a “sex war” by any other name. I believe that to win the sex war, we men must institute a formal sexual order in lieu of the current sexual anarcho-tyranny, and that means that marriage — be it monogamous or polygamous — must become the norm.

I consider monogamy to be vastly superior to polygamy, because in a monogamy each man gets laid, while in a polygamy only some men get laid. And monogamy has to be Patriarchal, which means that — essentially — women must be made to serve men, the heads of the household; it is men who organize society itself, because we are capable of doing that while women aren’t, and we certainly should be the organizers of our own families. And additionally, marriage has to be young; I think that the average age of marriage should be 10, meaning that many marriages will occur at considerably younger ages than that. A society with young, Patriarchal, and monogamous marriage as the norm is infinitely superior to the current situation of old, non-Patriarchal, and “serially monogamous” (not actually monogamous) bf/gf-ism being the norm.

Women should by-and-large be married and thus propertized, and the minority of chronically un-married women should serve as concubines, harlots, and pornstars, contributing in this way their services to us. Of course, some wives may also do prostitution and porn, with permission from their husbands. That’s not really advisable, because cuckoldry is something that most of us are upset about, and so child prostitution and child porn — occurring in before marriage, which, again, will be at a young age — may become more prevalent. A 7-year-old un-married pornography slut may get some hot jizz on her face in front of the camera, then settle down at the age of 10 as a housewife, and from then onward only ride her husband’s cock. I support that.

Dear Steve, I came across your website and read the question put forward about denouncing all genocide and your challenge to Christians to defend it. To answer the question, I would say that all genocide done by men is mass murder, but when God does it it is right. I know that sounds rather absurd, but let me explain why I think so.

God is a being who knows everything and has a strong sense of justice to fufill. Ecclesiastes 12:14 "For God will bring every act to justice, everything which is hidden, whether good or bad". It is good that there is a law which brings forth consequences for evil so that justice is appeased. Humans have a justice complex too. If your friend was kidnapped and murdered it would not be right for the murderer to go off scott free. Stealing is wrong, stuff like that we just know.

"The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life" Every man has sinned and therefore deserves death. God is perfect and all knowing, so only he can administer true justice. This is why it is only ok for God to take away life- only he knows every single circumstance of every single situation and the heart and mind of every person in those circumstances, so only he can and will bring any good/evil deed to true justice.

Considering this, he shows restraint and mercy to any person that sins that he does not kill right away. The Israelites had to make animal sacrifices in order to appease God's anger until the fufiller of the promise was come.

This leads to the another aspect of God which loves every single person he made so much that he sent his perfect son the Christ to die to pay the penalty for the sins of men. Jews were seen clean through faith in the promise and sincere adherence to the law and Christians are seen as clean of sin through the atoning sacrifice of Christ.

But then all this still seems kind of unfair for the people who got punished by death in the OT still doesn't it? Pharaoh wasnt even really given a chance to get saved by looking to the promise and honoring Yahweh, for the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart. This and the slaughter of children and infants really bothered me as well, I thought "could the God of the Bible who is loving and just really have slaughtered those infants and damned them to hell?" And I wavered in faith for a bit until I considered three things and made my own little hypothesis.

1, First point, (which sorry, Ive already stated lol) is that what's really fair is for all men to die by the punishment of God. The least fair thing of all is that Christ died for sin, because he was the only one without sin.

2. Secondly, God used the punishment of those people to bring good- He hardened Pharaohs heart and then obliterated him so that others may know that he was God. Word of God's deliverance for Israel and destruction of Pharaoh got around, and some were saved by this knowledge and clung to Yahweh. For example Rahab the prostitute had heard about what happened at the Red Sea and acknowledged Yahweh as God thereafter. Because of this she helped the spies and escaped death.

3. God is just, loving, and capable of pretty much anything.

Considering this I came up with my alternate dimension hypothesis for how God shows justice, love, and mercy all at the same time. The idea is that for every human soul, there is an alternate dimension with ideal circumstances for that person to love and choose Yahweh in return. So for every aborted baby, for pharoah, and for all who died without the knowledge of God- there is another dimension where things were better. eg. In another dimension Pharoah could have been an Israelite or lived somewhere else, and another person was in the role of Pharoah getting screwed over.

This is just one thing God could have done to show justice and love to every human he created, hes God so we just have to trust in Him to do the good things that he does.

So yeah I'm interested to here what you have to say in response, and what you think about my hypothesis lol

What's she going to do? Report to campus and put a sign up and ask that every guy that she had sex with, come forward so she can apologize?

Or maybe she should run an ad in the newspaper? Go on CNN? How about a Facebook page that says "Victims of Drunken Involuntary Sex - If I Raped You, Come Forward"

Or how about going to the police station and saying "I had sex with this guy when he was drunk. However many years ago. Arrest me."

If she came on and said "Hey, I fucked a bunch of dudes when we were all sloppy drunk and I took advantage of them and I really don't care, it would be an entirely different ballgame."

But I knew girls that pretty much fucked the whole football team when they were drunk. What's your excuse for them? That every guy really wanted to fuck her or they just fucked her so they could say that "Yeah, I hit it"?

I'm not pitying her for what she did. I'm saying that there's a point in your life where you can't go back and change shit that you did. Tell us about YOUR perfect life and how YOU have never screwed up on any level. The guys could have filed charges. They could have screamed. They could have punched her in the face. Whatever.

But she seems remorseful and truly beat up, all this time later, over what she did. So how do you think she should be granted justice? Should we gut her with a sword? How about going the ISIS route and beheading her? Is that good enough to satisfy you? Or maybe a suicide vest. Blow her and her unborn child to pieces. Maybe that will make you happy.

Jesus. The blindness....

Wow, victim blaming much?

If they didn't want to be sexually violated then they should have fought harder?

If, just for example, I had committed some sex offense many years ago against some vulnerable individual and had come to regret it, would you feel the same compassion or have the same forgiveness for me?

Let's say, hypothetically, I was a former child molester and/or child porn aficionado who turned my life around.

Would you advise me just not to do it again and move on?

What do you suggest? We don't know how old OP is. Let's just say that she's 30 years old and has been out of college for 6 years now.

Should she go to the Campus or City Police where her University was and turn herself in? Should she take out the ads that I recommended earlier?

What exactly should she do? That's what I want to know.

Yeah, be pissed at her. OK. Great. She's a pathetic person for doing what she did. So let's deal with her. What do you suggest? Shotgun to the head? Should we gut that kid out her? That'll really teach her a lesson!

C'mon! What say you?

Let's be real

"The guys could have filed charges. They could have screamed. They could have punched her in the face. Whatever."

That's your idea of being real? You're a fucking creep.

I'm a creep? Ha! So which one do you recommend for her? Beheading? Or gut her with a sword? Burn her alive? Chop off her boobs?

You are the one who seems to want blood, so what do you recommend?

I say, "Let's be real about this." She's coming forward years after this happened. Yeah, it's messed up but it is what it is.

So unless you are the one willing to gut her, chop her baby to pieces, burn her or do whatever other heinous punishment you think she deserves, I will be more realistic and say that she needs to fix herself and move on. Call me fucking creepy but I bet if it was your ass that fucked up and I was the Judge, you'd be fuckin' glad to get sentenced by me. I bet your story would change.

Stop being a hypocrite. What she did was wrong. Very wrong. But unless you're going to gut her, you can sit over there and have a hot steaming cup of STFU

And btw, there are plenty of child molesters and child porn viewers who get away with it. I've seen the Jerry Springer Show and I've also know people who were abused.

If the victim refuses to turn the perpetrator in, or testify against them, you are still faced with the same problem.

Let's just say that I'm an atheist and at this point, I say all they need to do is go to church and ask Jesus to forgive them and they're forgiven of their "sins". So why is this a big deal? Jesus will forgive them, why can't you?

Before the morality police jump on me, I'll point out that this is the "confessions" subreddit, and that I'm posting because I normally have to keep this secret and I felt like it'd be liberating to just say openly what I'm into and what I do, and if you want to be retarded and judgmental, you can just go fuck off. I know that my preferences and actions aren't consistent with "traditional morality," but of course that's all relative to culture, and it's just been my bad luck to live in a time and place where my sexual preferences are considered taboo.
So I'm an "active" pedophile, which means that I regularly have sex with children. My preference is for children between the ages of 7 and 12.
Professionally, I am a child psychologist; I have two PhDs, and I work part-time as an adjunct at a major research university. Obviously, it's part of my job to understand how kids think, and my work has put me in contact with hundreds of children over the years. I have only had sex with a small percentage of them--those whom I can be reasonably confident won't tell anyone, and whom I believe may enjoy the experience. Of course, child sexuality is a complex issue, but while I find it fascinating from a scientific point of view, my desire to fuck them is basically independent from my scientific/professional interest in them, and in general I don't care whether my actions will "harm" the child when I choose to get sexual with him or her.
I have two daughters, aged 9 and 16. I never touched the 16 year old. Their mother, my wife, died from breast cancer three years ago. The older one goes to a boarding school in Michigan, where she studies flute. I have been having regular sex with the younger one since she was six.
I don't necessarily prefer boys or girls. Both are attractive to me. I have always been attracted to children, since I myself was a child. I guess as I grew older, I never stopped finding people of that particular age range sexually desirable. I suppose I generally prefer "consensual" sex, although I also find "forced" scenarios also arousing.
I don't keep a tally, but I'd estimate that I've had some form of sexual contact with 50-60 children; full penis-in-vagina penetration with approximately 20 girls, anal sex with three girls, and anal sex with about a dozen boys. I would classify five of those encounters as "rape," but the vast majority were in the gray area of "consent," as is generally the case with children.
I suppose something that some readers may find interesting is that I have met several other pedophiles, who have similar preferences to mine. I suppose that many of you would be surprised about several things that I have learned in my interactions with other pedophiles. First, about how many secret pedophiles there are, how exceedingly common this sexual preference is; second, how common sex with children is; third, how often the child enjoys it; and fourth, how easy it is to "get away with it" in a society that basically treats pedophiles like "witches." If anyone wants to ask me details--note, I will not stupidly reveal any identifying information, so don't bother trying to "trick" me into giving up my address--then feel free to PM me, and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

"Crisis actor" is a fantastic rhetorical shiv against Globohomo. Even if the term isn't a precise description of the libshits who coordinate after a crisis to suspiciously parrot left-wing boilerplate, it gets under the skin of the agitprop makers, because the term does capture an emerging reality of liberal groupthink teams groomed by media.

I'm sure that the fact Trangender individuals have a suicide rate 40% higher than the general population has nothing to with it.

I legitimately don't understand people's obsession with normalising the idea of trangenderism. It's a mental illness like anorexia. You don't treat anorexia by telling people to starve themselves. You give them coping mechanisms so they can cope with the messed up pathways in their brain. Why the hell are people treating trangenderism by telling them to change their gender?

We're going to look back on this in 50 years the same way we did when we treated people with bipolar disorder with shock therapy. It's absolutely ridiculous. These people need help. Feeding their problem is not helping.